Legal Opinion

Corrigan v. Methodist Hospital

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided January 11, 1995No. 2:94-cv-01478PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

JOYNER, District Judge.

Defendant Donald Myers has filed five separate motions in limine with this Court. He addresses all of them in a single memorandum of law, as we resolve of them today. Myers seeks to exclude the following evidence:

1) any evidence regarding the regulatory status by the Food and Drug Administration of pedicle screws;

2) any expert testimony regarding lack of informed consent;

3) any evidence regarding an alleged financial tie between Myers and Acromed Corporation;

4) any expert testimony by plaintiff regarding the materiality of a risk and/or the ultimate…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Oscar Hines v. Consolidated Rail Corporation v. General Electric Company, Monsanto Company, and Penn Central CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
  2. Festa v. GreenbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Sagala v. TavaresSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Jozsa v. HottensteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. United States v. ScarfoDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1989

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In re Mirena IUD Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2016
  2. Soldo v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Shea v. EsenstenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API